Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider
registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.

But if that is one’s position then it is incumbant unpon you to explain how ALL shaft doors were not blown off their hinges ALL the way down the shaft.

Actually, it's not incumbent upon anyone here to explain anything to you.

You want to believe that the jet fuel couldn't have caused the reported damage? Fine. Knock yourself out.

You want to believe that there were bombs in the wtc towers? Great!

But before you saddle up and head for the hills to start your militia training for the coming revolution, just ponder the possibility that your beliefs are wrong.

'Truthers' love to come here waving their little obsessions in our faces and demanding answers to the minutiae of what was an extremely chaotic and unprecedented event.

But it's not for us to answer your questions, it is for you to answer our. You have to convince people to join you in this coming revolution. People will have to change their lives and possibly put those lives in harms way if the perps are really within your own government.

So, questions from personal incredulity don't really cut it in the real world. Your 'common sense' aint worth squat if there is the slightest possibility that events happened exactly the way the 'official' account has described them.

Could a fuel explosion have occurred within a well ventilated (and damaged) elevator shaft? Damn right it could have.

There were several elevators on the floor the plane impacted. The fuel went in all of them. I don't know if the shafts were separated from each other, or several elevators were side-by-side in the same shaft. If the latter, it explains how fuel could get into other elevators.

again cat, you never fail to miss the point of my argyment.
no.1 i know there were several elevators on the floor were the plane impacted. but according to NIST only 6, 7, and 50 stretched from the impact zone to the basment and lobby. even if other elevator shafts were exposed to jet fuel in zone three - they could not simply leak down to zone 2 and 1. it was in the latetr zone were people were incinerated within or beside local elevators.

i hope you can get that through your head.

and by the way that above quote of yours explains NOTHING.

Originally Posted by WildCat

Only about 15% of the fuel burned in the initial fireball, after that point there was no more oxygen left to support combustion. The fuel that didn't burn was then free to flow across the floors and down the shafts until sufficient oxygen re-entered the building, whereupon it ignited explosively.

i heard it all before cat. besides there are conflicting reports between FEMA and NIST concerning the amount of jet fuel remaining.

by let us say NIST are right and half of the jet fuel remained after the initial impact, you are still left with the same problem i.e. how to explain this shaft to shaft transfer of jet fuel.

and obviously you dont bother to read the posts i have been making. where and how did this "sufficient oxygen re-enter the building"? i noticed you havent replied to my comments about your "the ventilation comes from outside!". and even if we have jet fuel flowing over and across floors, assuming these floors were not porous and assuming the elevatpor shaft would have a cap, then it seems absurd to suggest that the jet fuel flowed through concrete floors - about 90. the time it would take alone to achieve this rules out leakage throught the floors. the only remotely possible way is shaft to shaft transfer via some miraculous explosion.

Originally Posted by WildCat

With so many firemen describing the smell of jet fuel, why would you think this didn't happen? Did NWO agents go around pouring jet fuel all over the elevator shafts?

apart from your sarcasm this is a good point and i recognise it as a problem that critics of the official story must address.

first to quote hard lines

Originally Posted by hard lines

A human can smell fuel at as low as 1 part per million

thats a very small amount. now i am not denying that jet fuel travelled down 6, 7 the length of the building. in fact it is precisely because it did that firemen and people could smell jet fuel.

a more conspiratorial explanation would suggest that liquid explosives that smelled "like" kerosene may have been planted in order to disable the elevator system, destroy the water pumping and hamper the firemens effort inextinguishing the fire.

I hope you can get this through your head - you haven't proved anything! Not only have you not proved that any but 6,7, and 50 blew out (as only those were actually named in your quote above), you haven't proven that elevators didn't share a shaft with each other. And, as it turns out, they did! Look in NISTNCSTAR1-7, page 11, and you'll note that 2 or 3 elevators shared the same shaft.

Quote:

i heard it all before cat. besides there are conflicting reports between FEMA and NIST concerning the amount of jet fuel remaining.

I have no idea what FEMA said, but NIST estimates 15-20% burned in the initial fireball, which was all that could burn given the known amount of oxygen available. If you have numbers that prove that wrong, present your math please.

Quote:

by let us say NIST are right and half of the jet fuel remained after the initial impact, you are still left with the same problem i.e. how to explain this shaft to shaft transfer of jet fuel.

80-85% of the fuel remained, and 2-3 elevators shared the same shaft.

Quote:

and obviously you dont bother to read the posts i have been making. where and how did this "sufficient oxygen re-enter the building"?

Did you not notice the big freaking holes in the building from the airplane hitting it?

Quote:

i noticed you havent replied to my comments about your "the ventilation comes from outside!". and even if we have jet fuel flowing over and across floors, assuming these floors were not porous and assuming the elevatpor shaft would have a cap, then it seems absurd to suggest that the jet fuel flowed through concrete floors - about 90. the time it would take alone to achieve this rules out leakage throught the floors. the only remotely possible way is shaft to shaft transfer via some miraculous explosion.

Already pointed out that the elevators shared shafts, and that the plane strike would have damaged the fire damping system.

Quote:

thats a very small amount. now i am not denying that jet fuel travelled down 6, 7 the length of the building. in fact it is precisely because it did that firemen and people could smell jet fuel.

The firemen described a very strong smell of jet fuel - not trace amounts. Maybe you could explain how all that unburned fuel didn't obey gravity and flow downward?

Quote:

a more conspiratorial explanation would suggest that liquid explosives that smelled "like" kerosene may have been planted in order to disable the elevator system, destroy the water pumping and hamper the firemens effort inextinguishing the fire.

The standpipes were damaged by the planes impacting, there are many accounts of the water flowing down the stairs because of this. And if you have to invent a liquid exposive that smells like jet fuel while simultaneously claiming fuel won't flow downward and can somehow burn without oxygen present to make your theory work that's a sign your theory is not very viable.

I hope you can get this through your head - you haven't proved anything! Not only have you not proved that any but 6,7, and 50 blew out (as only those were actually named in your quote above), you haven't proven that elevators didn't share a shaft with each other. And, as it turns out, they did! Look in NISTNCSTAR1-7, page 11, and you'll note that 2 or 3 elevators shared the same shaft.

In NIST NCSTAR 1-7, page 34 (page 72 of the PDF file). Go to gravy’s paper – there you will find a lovely coloured diagram with red yellow and blue. The point is that the official story holds that elevator shaft 6, 7 and 50. were the only elevator shafts that went from the impact zone to the basment level. This FACT is not disputed.

Whether they shared elevators in the same shaft is irrelevant. We know there was a fireball emitted from a “local” elevator shaft in the lobby on zone one, thus you still have to explain “shaft to shaft” transfer or leakage of the jet fuel. You understand that the local elevator shafts on zone one are not inside the freight elevator shafts or the express elevator shafts, and they do not reach the impact zone. Go back and look in NISTNCSTAR1-7, page 11.

Originally Posted by WildCat

I have no idea what FEMA said, but NIST estimates 15-20% burned in the initial fireball, which was all that could burn given the known amount of oxygen available. If you have numbers that prove that wrong, present your math please.

80-85% of the fuel remained, and 2-3 elevators shared the same shaft.

The amount of unburned fuel remaining in the building post initial explosion is irrelevant to my question. I will accept for arguments sake that roughly 70% of the fuel remained but that hardly tells me how shaft to shaft transfer is supposed to have occured. Does it? As for the elevators sharing shafts, well that too is irrelevant as i explained above.

Originally Posted by WildCat

Did you not notice the big freaking holes in the building from the airplane hitting it?

You love going back to this point dont you cat.
No.1 this thread is or was about “backdraft”. It is widely acknowledged that the combustible jet fuel in th elevator shaft was oxyegen starved. Do you know why cat? Because if there was sufficient oxygen, or an oxygen rich environment within the elevator shaft, as a result of “the big freaking hole”, dont you think there would have been a FAE all the way down the shaft? in other words because we KNOW that there was NOT a deflagration or FAE all the way down the shaft on every floor we KNOW that the environment within the elevator shaft was oxygen starved.

“big hole” give me a break. (and for the record i accept there was a big hole, but can you accept that the elevator shaft was not an oxygen rich environment as a result of this big hole?)

Originally Posted by WildCat

Already pointed out that the elevators shared shafts, and that the plane strike would have damaged the fire damping system.

Already explained that sharing shafts is irrelevent unless you can prove that a local elevator shared the same shaft as a freight or express elevator shaft. damage to the fire damping system could only mean that more jet fuel could be burned up and consummed meaning that there would be less jet fuel to travel or leak in liquid form and magically enter local elevator shafts explosively. this point does nothing for you.

Originally Posted by WildCat

The firemen described a very strong smell of jet fuel - not trace amounts. Maybe you could explain how all that unburned fuel didn't obey gravity and flow downward?

No buddy it is you that has the problem with gravity. For me its simple. Jet fuel fell down shaft 6, 7, 50 to the bottom of those shafts. Jet fuel travelled across the floors below the imapct zone perhaps even down the stairs. I dont think however that it could have leaked through 90 floors of carpet and concrete by gravity. have jumped off the stairs onto an elevator shaft. So you my friend have to explain the shaft to shaft transfer of jet fuel. Such a feat not only means that an explosion is necessary but also that the descending jet fuel defies gravity in that it must take a left or right turn after the explosion takes place. Read lefty sergeants proposal.

Originally Posted by WildCat

The standpipes were damaged by the planes impacting, there are many accounts of the water flowing down the stairs because of this. And if you have to invent a liquid exposive that smells like jet fuel while simultaneously claiming fuel won't flow downward and can somehow burn without oxygen present to make your theory work that's a sign your theory is not very viable.

I never claimed fuel wont flow downwards. I never claimed fuel can burn without oxygen present.

Listen, here is the situation. You have to explain shaft to shaft transfer and i have to explain the smell of jet fuel. A fireball emitting from a local elevator shaft in zone one is not possible – not possible – if shaft to shaft transfer is not possible. So theres your job.

As a critic of the official story my job is to explain the “percieved smell” of jet fuel on the incinerated people. Recall some firemen also perceived they heard bombs like in a demolition.

Actually, it's not incumbent upon anyone here to explain anything to you.

You want to believe that the jet fuel couldn't have caused the reported damage? Fine. Knock yourself out.

You want to believe that there were bombs in the wtc towers? Great!

But before you saddle up and head for the hills to start your militia training for the coming revolution, just ponder the possibility that your beliefs are wrong.

'Truthers' love to come here waving their little obsessions in our faces and demanding answers to the minutiae of what was an extremely chaotic and unprecedented event.

But it's not for us to answer your questions, it is for you to answer our. You have to convince people to join you in this coming revolution. People will have to change their lives and possibly put those lives in harms way if the perps are really within your own government.

So, questions from personal incredulity don't really cut it in the real world. Your 'common sense' aint worth squat if there is the slightest possibility that events happened exactly the way the 'official' account has described them.

Could a fuel explosion have occurred within a well ventilated (and damaged) elevator shaft? Damn right it could have.

Don't believe me?
I wont lose any sleep over that.

took a long time to right eh?

you planning on entering politics or something?

you dont have to answer any question from me - i dont give a damn. but the thing is bubba - we are in this thing called a forum were diague, discussion and argumentation takes place. where people ask questions and people gives answers. i am not shouting from the top of my lungs that 911 was an inside job. but if an nobody like me can point out obvious difficulties then i would say a new investigation is needed. but you can remain in cosy little england drinking your tea - and if you decide to respond or engage in a debate with me i would be happy.

no - next time you read my posts please try to undetrstand what i am saying.

i am not denying a fireball came out and killed people in the lobby. i am saying HOW could this have happened if the ONLY route for the jet fuel from the imapct zone was 6, 7 and 50 as stated by NSIT. i included testimony from a person that was eventually killed from a fireball in the lobby. her friend cant understand either how the fireball could have been expelled from a "local" elevator shaft.

Wildcat-With so many firemen describing the smell of jet fuel, why would you think this didn't happen? Did NWO agents go around pouring jet fuel all over the elevator shafts?

Smell of jet fuel where? Did you miss the description of jet fuel that exited the building in the streets after the crash?

Smelling jet fuel does not equate to the blast damage suffered in the lower levels. If I smell cookies, do I have cookies in the room? Of course not. Please use better logic.

Besides, NIST said a fireball, not jet fuel cascading down the shafts and then pooling all the way to Sublevel 6.

Quote:

Start by assuming that the only air available for burning was already present when the aircraft struck. This is a plausible assumption given
the short time period available.-NIST
NIST NCSTAR 1-5A, WTC Investigation Page. 79

Notice something left out when calculating the amount of jet fuel left in the building? That is right boys and girls, the big hole in the building that allowed oxygen in. This of course brings into question the actual amount of fuel that was not ignited. But that is a different story.

Now what you can do that NIST did not. Take an image of the elevator shafts and trace the fireball path that caused the destruction in the lowest levels of the basement of the North Tower. Then match that up with the eyewitness accounts and testimony of survivors. Just to clue you in, you can't do both and arrive at the conclusion the official story tells us without the use of something else in the sublevels of WTC: North Tower.

All of the above information should bring us to the logical conclusion that a fuel-air explosion did not travel hundreds of feet down the main freight elevator shaft of WTC1, from the impacted floors to the basements, to cause structural damage to the basement floors and lobby. Car 50 was the only elevator with access from the impacted floors of WTC1 to the sub levels B6 and below, and its operator survived, having experienced no explosions or fireballs down the main freight shaft.
That such a fireball could have traveled down Car 6 has not specifically been ruled out by the above information, but it could not have extended beyond sub level B1, whereas explosive events caused much destruction on lower floors.
Also, considering an FAE traveling down this shaft sufficient in strength to destroy a machine shop in the basement levels (as per Pecoraro’s testimony), even if this elevator had access to this floor, and cause elevators servicing the lowest floors to blow out (as per Walsh’s testimony), as well as additional structure damage in the basements, it seems extremely unlikely, if not impossible, that the shaft itself, and neighboring floors all the way down would not be similarly destroyed by the massive over pressures accompanying this FAE down the building. Put simply, an FAE moving down an elevator shaft and causing severe damage in basement levels with massive force, could also be expected to destroy the shaft itself, especially since this shaft would be a very confined area, and its wall supposedly not reinforced by any concrete in the walls or etc.
The visible fuel-air explosions caused by the impacts visibly failed to destroy even the outer perimeter columns of the impacted floors, or to even remove their aluminum cladding, which was only fastened on and not solidly connected. Only the plane impacts themselves severed perimeter columns or caused such damage to the aluminum cladding. There is no evidence of great over pressures from the fireball itself if it traveled down the shafts either in the interior or exterior.
How, then, could a fireball that failed to remove this aluminum cladding in its immediate blast, travel down over a thousand feet of an unprotected elevator shaft and maintain sufficient over pressures to shatter concrete and steel fire doors, and cause a cave in at level B-4?
It has already been shown that the operator of elevator 50, the main freight, did not even experience a fireball, let alone life-threatening overpressures. This fits logically with the lack of exterior damage shown above.

More realistic explanations of the WTC1 basement events, including the use of secondary explosive devices, should be considered.

And just perhaps that is why there were multiple reports of authorities who thought a truck bomb or additional explosives were used in combination with the jet attacks. And just perhaps that is why multiple survivors were reminded of the 1993 truck bomb damage based upon what they witnessed. And just perhaps the terrorists used the same type of tactics they have used in the past.

__________________"I would imagine that if you took the top expert in that type of work and gave him the assignment of bringing these buildings down with explosives, I would bet that he could do it."-John SKilling-Head Structural Engineer WTC-1993 Seattle Times

To put the proverbial nail into the coffin of this discussion, please examine Page 5 in this document, or better yet, read the whole thing and then try to form a reasonable argument supporting the official theory.

__________________"I would imagine that if you took the top expert in that type of work and gave him the assignment of bringing these buildings down with explosives, I would bet that he could do it."-John SKilling-Head Structural Engineer WTC-1993 Seattle Times

To put the proverbial nail into the coffin of this discussion, please examine Page 5 in this document, or better yet, read the whole thing and then try to form a reasonable argument supporting the official theory.

If your ultimate proof is a paper that says "The kinetic energy of the jet fuel couldn't have caused significant damage, and the contents fire couldn't have caused the collapse," without the slightest pretence at an attempt to justify either statement, or even analyse the energies involved, then I think you've done a very good job of putting the final nail into the coffin. Thanks for making it clear you have nothing intelligent to say.

Dave

__________________Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

In NIST NCSTAR 1-7, page 34 (page 72 of the PDF file). Go to gravy’s paper – there you will find a lovely coloured diagram with red yellow and blue. The point is that the official story holds that elevator shaft 6, 7 and 50. were the only elevator shafts that went from the impact zone to the basment level. This FACT is not disputed.

You still haven't proved that any elevators but 6,7, and 50 were affected! When you do that we'll talk about the rest.

Quote:

Whether they shared elevators in the same shaft is irrelevant. We know there was a fireball emitted from a “local” elevator shaft in the lobby on zone one, thus you still have to explain “shaft to shaft” transfer or leakage of the jet fuel.

Except you haven't proved that any other shafts were affected. There were certainly elevators in the lobby that went all the way up.

Quote:

The amount of unburned fuel remaining in the building post initial explosion is irrelevant to my question. I will accept for arguments sake that roughly 70% of the fuel remained but that hardly tells me how shaft to shaft transfer is supposed to have occured. Does it? As for the elevators sharing shafts, well that too is irrelevant as i explained above.

Your math is wrong (100%-20%=80%), and you haven't shown that any shaft-to-shaft transfer occurred.

Quote:

You love going back to this point dont you cat.
No.1 this thread is or was about “backdraft”. It is widely acknowledged that the combustible jet fuel in th elevator shaft was oxyegen starved.

No, it wasn't! People did breathe in those elevators, yes?

Quote:

Do you know why cat? Because if there was sufficient oxygen, or an oxygen rich environment within the elevator shaft, as a result of “the big freaking hole”, dont you think there would have been a FAE all the way down the shaft? in other words because we KNOW that there was NOT a deflagration or FAE all the way down the shaft on every floor we KNOW that the environment within the elevator shaft was oxygen starved.

What do you think happened to the oxygen in the shafts? Where did it go? It was there when the planes struck, yes?

Quote:

“big hole” give me a break. (and for the record i accept there was a big hole, but can you accept that the elevator shaft was not an oxygen rich environment as a result of this big hole?)

There was oxygen in the shafts! Your mythical NWO explosive that smells just like kerosene would need oxygen to explode, yes?

Quote:

Already explained that sharing shafts is irrelevent unless you can prove that a local elevator shared the same shaft as a freight or express elevator shaft. damage to the fire damping system could only mean that more jet fuel could be burned up and consummed meaning that there would be less jet fuel to travel or leak in liquid form and magically enter local elevator shafts explosively. this point does nothing for you.

Once again, what is your evidence that any elevator besides 6,7, or 50 had explosions?

Quote:

So you my friend have to explain the shaft to shaft transfer of jet fuel. Such a feat not only means that an explosion is necessary but also that the descending jet fuel defies gravity in that it must take a left or right turn after the explosion takes place. Read lefty sergeants proposal.

Oh dear, once again you forget that many elevators were damaged by the plane strikes - fuel went down all the elevator shafts, even the local ones. Shaft explosions weren't confined only to the basement and lobby - they happened higher up as well. Finally, fuel from the plane did enter the 78th floor of WTC 2, and many people were killed on that floor. That means in WTC 2 even more elevators were available that went all the way down to the lobby.

Quote:

I never claimed fuel wont flow downwards. I never claimed fuel can burn without oxygen present.

But your NWO explosive liquid that smells just like kerosene can?

Quote:

As a critic of the official story my job is to explain the “percieved smell” of jet fuel on the incinerated people. Recall some firemen also perceived they heard bombs like in a demolition.

I've heard firemen describing the floors hitting on another in the collapse as being distinct for each floor - boom boom boom! Not everything that goes boom is a bomb, especially when a giant building is collapsing. Some even described the bodies of the jumpers hitting the roof that way.

Now, are you going to present your evidence of fuel being in shafts other than 6, 7, and 50 at the ground and basement levels?

To put the proverbial nail into the coffin of this discussion, please examine Page 5 in this document, or better yet, read the whole thing and then try to form a reasonable argument supporting the official theory.

man when you can actually visualise the amount of jet fuel it really raises eyebrows.

that paper should keep these officialites busy for a while. so fasten your seat and wait for the ad hominems!!

buy the way i am still waiting for an explanation behind the "shaft to shaft" transfer of the jet fuel.

man when you can actually visualise the amount of jet fuel it really raises eyebrows.

that paper should keep these officialites busy for a while. so fasten your seat and wait for the ad hominems!!.

It won't keep anyone busy for a moment. The whole paper is a non-argument. It claims that it's ridiculous that the towers could have collapsed from impact and fire, but makes no attempt at calculations to support that claim.

Let's try something along similar lines, though. Suppose explosives were used to bring down the towers. How much, filling how many U-Haul trucks, would be needed? When you've worked it out, and found out that it's far less than the amount of jet fuel, will that lower your eyebrows again? Or will you claim that just looking at the size of the amount of explosives doesn't matter, but somehow it does when you're just looking at the size of the amount of jet fuel?

Dave

__________________Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

You still haven't proved that any elevators but 6,7, and 50 were affected! When you do that we'll talk about the rest.

I can tell this is going to take a while.

Ok, in post #159 i included testimony that traces the movement and final destination of car 6,7 and 50. we know who was inside car 50 (griffith and cruz) and where it ended (b2-3). although we do not know who was inside car 6 and 7 we do know where it ended (b2)

Now, in my post #159 i included further testimony. For example, the testimony of firefighter Timothy Brown, who was on the 3rd floor when he saw people incinerated inside an elevator. we KNOW that these people on the 3rd floor could not have been inside car 6, 7 or 50 BECAUSE they are in an elevator on the 3rd floor!! Its that simple cat.

Originally Posted by WildCat

Except you haven't proved that any other shafts were affected. There were certainly elevators in the lobby that went all the way up.

People found incinerated in an elevator on the 3rd floor proves that this shaft was affected. And we know that this shaft was NOT the shaft of 6, 7 or 50. we also know that the ONLY shafts that could reach from the lobby to the IMPACT ZONE was 6,7, and 50. there was certainly no other elevator shaft aside from 6, 7 and 50 that went all the way up from the lobby.

Originally Posted by WildCat

Your math is wrong (100%-20%=80%), and you haven't shown that any shaft-to-shaft transfer occurred.

Dont care much about amount of fuel for now and i have shown that shaft-to-shaft transfer must have occurred in order to explain what incinerated these people inside 3rd floor elevator. If shaft-to-shaft transfer is impossible then the current official theory has been debunked.

Originally Posted by WildCat

No, it wasn't! People did breathe in those elevators, yes?

Yes cat, they did breathe.

Originally Posted by WildCat

What do you think happened to the oxygen in the shafts? Where did it go? It was there when the planes struck, yes?

If combustible jet fuel was travelling down the car 50 shaft then the oxygen would have been consummed. The amount of oxygen required for a person to breathe is not the same as the amount of oxygen required to ingnite an FAE.

It is widely acknowledged by defenders of the official story that the elevator shafts were an oxygen starved environment. Take your objections up with them. But like i said earlier if there was plenty of oxygen in the car 50 shaft then we would expect an FAE all the way down, blowing out shaft doors all the way down, but this is not what happened.
The official line states that a fireball came down the shaft and it required more oxygen to deflagrate.

Originally Posted by WildCat

There was oxygen in the shafts! Your mythical NWO explosive that smells just like kerosene would need oxygen to explode, yes?

No, an explosive could be remote detonated.

Originally Posted by WildCat

Once again, what is your evidence that any elevator besides 6,7, or 50 had explosions?

Incinerated people inside an elevator on 3rd floor.

Originally Posted by WildCat

Oh dear, once again you forget that many elevators were damaged by the plane strikes - fuel went down all the elevator shafts, even the local ones. Shaft explosions weren't confined only to the basement and lobby - they happened higher up as well. Finally, fuel from the plane did enter the 78th floor of WTC 2, and many people were killed on that floor. That means in WTC 2 even more elevators were available that went all the way down to the lobby.

Holy moly...
The towers had THREE zones. It is plausible on the third zone fuel managed to enter the severed shafts of local elevators on the third zone...but not on the first zone!!!!!!!!!!!!

So tell me where did these shaft explosions occur? On what floor?

Why was the jet fuel not consummed in that area by the explosion?

How could descending jet fuel pass horizontally into another shaft?

Originally Posted by WildCat

By the way your NWO explosive liquid that smells just like kerosene can?

I never said it couldnt, i said that i never claimed that.

Originally Posted by WildCat

I've heard firemen describing the floors hitting on another in the collapse as being distinct for each floor - boom boom boom! Not everything that goes boom is a bomb, especially when a giant building is collapsing. Some even described the bodies of the jumpers hitting the roof that way.

Lots of fuels smell similar also.

Besides is it odd or down right impossible that griffith and cruz did not smell or see any jet fuel? I mean car 50 shaft was THE ONLY pathway that could reach the sub levels B6 and below from the impacted floors. Hmmm...how you explain that given that a human can smell fuel as low as one part per million in the air??

It won't keep anyone busy for a moment. The whole paper is a non-argument. It claims that it's ridiculous that the towers could have collapsed from impact and fire, but makes no attempt at calculations to support that claim.

Let's try something along similar lines, though. Suppose explosives were used to bring down the towers. How much, filling how many U-Haul trucks, would be needed? When you've worked it out, and found out that it's far less than the amount of jet fuel, will that lower your eyebrows again? Or will you claim that just looking at the size of the amount of explosives doesn't matter, but somehow it does when you're just looking at the size of the amount of jet fuel?

I've just pointed out that there's no argument there to address. If you can't see that you're not worth talking to any more.

Dave

__________________Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

No one can conclusively know what occured when the aircraft impacted the towers. No one. Why is it so hard to believe a fireball could do what it damn well pleased in a chaotic event such as 9/11? You understand the forces involved, right?

Why does that have to point to explosives, and if it does in your mind, why did the collapse occur so much later? What was the purpose of this explosion if it was part of a CD, but did not initiate a collapse or even occur at the time of the actual collapse?

It's a silly argument you're making and an even sillier thing to ponder considering the amount of evidence supporting the accepted theory.

Do you have a detailed HVAC blueprint? Without one, the question isn't going to be accurately answered.

so what your basically saying is - i dont know the answer!

you dont need a HVAC blueprint either.

we know elevator shafts other than 6, 7 and 50 were affected.

what i wish to discuss is the “mechanism” by which this jet fuel could pass from one closed elevator shaft into another.

lefty sergeant’s suggestion is at least better than your “i need a map of america to discuss how to travel from washington to new york” effort.

Lefty suggests that

Originally Posted by leftysergeant

The walls between elevator shafts were just sheet rock, easily blown out by a slow-propogating explosion such as fuel would create. This accounts for the leakage into shafts not communicating with the impact area.

This is why i am in this forum. To debate intelligent people that have ideas and knowledge. Not people like yourself who choose to avoid hard questions.

Lefty tells us the type of material between elevator shafts, he tells us the mechanism. And here’s the shocker...he didnt need a map!!

Next question then is how slow is this explosion? we only have around 30 secs from the plane impact for this to occur. since one person was burnt by a fireball in the lobby that emitted from a local elevator. you can read that testimony in one of my previous posts.

would this explosion not consume the jet fuel? Recall the fireball that entered the lobby, was there excess fuel vapour to cause another deflagration after the first? No, and there was no testimony either that states otherwise. no comments of pools of jet fuel on the lobby floor.

Imagine you have an experiment and you drop a certain quantity of jet fuel and somehow create a deflagration. you place a sheet rock wall similar to that in the towers infront of the deflagration. I seriously doubt the descending fuel could change direction and traverse horizontally into a pit behind the rubbled/damaged wall.

now even if some vapour, gas, or liquid could survive consumption from the slow propogating explosion this tiny fraction of liquid would need to be sufficient enough to incinerate people within an elevator. I dont buy it.

Easy. It was already a fireball (No fuel smell), and the speed precluded early detection. Was it really too hard to figure that out by yourself?

what about the explosion supposedly caused by a fireball at b2-3 level? woudlnt that leave a trace of jet fuel?

this fireball had to pass over their elevator (car 50) perhaps they didnt smell it as you claim but they could have seen it, or felt a slight increase in heat. in a previous post #158 i include one testimony of someone inside an elevator when a fireball past it. go read that.

surely this fireball would have ignited once in contact with the sparks from the emergency brakes of car 50?

no, i must be crazy. your right, all the damage done in the basement from turning a machine shop and car park into rubble ( Pecoraro’s testimony),
causing elevators servicing the lowest floors to blow out (Walsh’s testimony), causing structural damage to the PATH Plaza, human damage etc was all caused by a fireball with no smell of jet fuel. yet jet fuel was smelled all over the building from much lesser events.

now what could cause a explosion with no jet fuel? i will let you dwell on that one amigo.

besides if your saying that an extremely powerful FAE from jet fuel came barrelling down the shaft of car 50, past car 50 undetected, then exploded leaving all that damage without leaving a trace or odor of jet fuel - then i want what your smoking!!!

oh one more thing - whats this speed precluded early detection lark? their was no detection early or late, pre or post explosion in the car 50 elevator shaft. THAT WAS MY POINT. THIS IS NOT POSSIBLE IF THE EXPLOSION WAS SUPPOSEDLY CAUSED BY A BUCKET LOAD OF JET FUEL - is that really too hard to figure out bubba??

To put the proverbial nail into the coffin of this discussion, please examine Page 5 in this document, or better yet, read the whole thing and then try to form a reasonable argument supporting the official theory.

If these calculations are accurate the paper the WTC towers were hit by 20 ton cans of fuel at 450 mph that then burst open and spread an ENTIRE floor's worth of area with 1/4 inch deep kerosene that then burst into flames...but caused insignificant damage. :

what i wish to discuss is the “mechanism” by which this jet fuel could pass from one closed elevator shaft into another.

I believe the 'forrest from the trees' analogy applies here. If you don't know how the shafts were interconnected via HVAC ductwork, you don't know jack. Hence, without HVAC plans you don't know, and neither does anyone else without those plans. I take it you've never worked around or on HVAC equipment.

I believe the 'forrest from the trees' analogy applies here. If you don't know how the shafts were interconnected via HVAC ductwork, you don't know jack. Hence, without HVAC plans you don't know, and neither does anyone else without those plans. I take it you've never worked around or on HVAC equipment.

I don't think he knows what the inside of a elevator shaft looks like. I think he's picturing a closed tube of some sort when in reality its more like an open section in the core of the building. Two or more shafts may occupy the same area with nothing but space between them.

I got the chance a while back to ride the top of a car at the Hancock building in Boston. It was more than a little scary with nothing around you and a long way down.

__________________"Remember that the goal of conspiracy rhetoric is to bog down the discussion, not to make progress toward a solution" Jay Windley

"How many leaves on the seventh branch of the fourth tree?" is meaningless when you are in the wrong forest: ozeco41

I believe the 'forrest from the trees' analogy applies here. If you don't know how the shafts were interconnected via HVAC ductwork, you don't know jack. Hence, without HVAC plans you don't know, and neither does anyone else without those plans. I take it you've never worked around or on HVAC equipment.

now, what you will see in this floor section is that each tower was divided into three sections by skylobbies. that means that even if the shafts were interconnected the local shafts in the lobby and section one did not vertically go all the way to the top of the building!!! if that were the case then all the local shafts would have plumetted to the lobby piled on top of one another. they didnt because the local shafts were divided horizontally.

damage to the basement level was caused by a fireball descending the freight car 50 elevator shaft.

"The doors were blown off by the fireball that came down the elevator shaft (Basement level of WTC 1)." (NIST NCSTAR 1-8, p.43)

“A jet fuel fireball erupted upon impact and shot down at least one bank of elevators.The fireball exploded onto numerous lower floors, including the 77th and 22nd; the West Street lobby level; and the B4 level, four stories below ground.”– 9/11 Commission Report, P. 285

so the magic fireball is supposed to have past the freight car 50 and then burst down the shaft door at b2-3.

read the following statement by Harry Waizer. this is what one expects to hear when a fireball passes over your elevator car!!

Waizer, to the 9/11 Commission: "The elevator was ascending when, suddenly, I felt it rocked by an explosion, and then felt it plummeting. Orange, streaming sparks were apparent through the gaps in the doors at the sides of the elevator as the elevator scraped the walls of the shaft. The elevator burst into flame. I began to beat at the flames, burning my hands, arms and legs in the process. The flames went out, but I was hit in the face and neck by a separate fireball that came through the gap in the side of the elevator doors. The elevator came to a stop on the 78th floor, the doors opened, and I jumped out"

arturo griffith or marlene cruz report no sparks, no heat, no flames, in fact there is no mention or even the slighest allusion that a fireball had past their car. kinda strange dont you think? and lets not forget, this fireball had the strength to blown down the shaft door at b2-3, the PATH, turn carparks into rubble etc yet it magically did no harm to car 50, the shaft, or its occupants. there wasnt even a smell of jet fuel detected by griffith or cruz either!!!

so debunkers - explain to me how this is POSSIBLE. how could an FAE pass the elevator car 50 cause emense damage to basement levels yet it past undetected by the car 50 occupants????

can anyone debunk this??

i dont think so.

and because nobody can that means that the official story has been DEBUNKED and secondary devices must be considered.

and please if you do respond stay on point by addressing the question that i have just stated.

We've answered this over and over again, despite your claim that "no one can answer this."

There is no requirement for a fireball to pass the elevator. All that is required is for fuel to pass the elevator. Vapor, liquid streams, droplets, whatever. The amount of fuel that has to pass, as I demonstrated rigorously, is quite reasonable.

The fuel almost certainly ignited at several different places. Not just one big 80-story high fireball. Lots of fireballs.

arturo griffith or marlene cruz report no sparks, no heat, no flames, in fact there is no mention or even the slighest allusion that a fireball had past their car. kinda strange dont you think? and lets not forget, this fireball had the strength to blown down the shaft door at b2-3, the PATH, turn carparks into rubble etc yet it magically did no harm to car 50, the shaft, or its occupants. there wasnt even a smell of jet fuel detected by griffith or cruz either!!!

Also, it should be noted that this narrative is not entirely factual. Griffith and Cruz certainly did experience the indications of a fireball's presence, and were fortunately pulled from freight car 50A just before it came down the shaft.

Elevator operator Arturo Grffith was in freight car 50A with carpenter Marlene Cruz: "The whole car shook and juddered as he heard an ominous noise from above." Source

"'I felt the explosion and the elevator dropped,' Arturo said at St. Vincents Hospital in Manhattan, where he's being treated for a broken leg." Source

"Arturo Griffith was in a freight elevator when the building was attacked. The elevator dropped to B1 (the basement level), fell below the landing. He was trapped in the elevator beneath debris and unconscious. He remembers seeing a beam of light. He called out. The smoke was so thick; Arturo could not see his own hand. So his rescuers had to follow his voice to find him. 'I don't know who saved me. It was so black and smoky. I couldn't see nothin',' Arturo said. 'When they got me out, I told them there was someone else down there, a woman. They went back to get her. Seconds after they pulled her out, a ball of fire came down the shaft. They almost got killed.' " Source

I don't think he knows what the inside of a elevator shaft looks like. I think he's picturing a closed tube of some sort when in reality its more like an open section in the core of the building. Two or more shafts may occupy the same area with nothing but space between them.

I got the chance a while back to ride the top of a car at the Hancock building in Boston. It was more than a little scary with nothing around you and a long way down.

Exactly. It seems to be a fairly common misconception, though. I think that some people erroneously think that the hoistways in large skyscrapers are the same as the elevator "shafts" they may have seen in a movie rendition or those they may be familiar with in their own experience in low rise buildings. They are not.

In modern skyscrapers, it is common for multiple elevator cars in multiple hoistways to share common, unseparated space within the interior (core) space that they occupy. Some people have a completely inaccurate impression and belief that every elevator they occupy is in its own dedicated space, cordoned off from all other hoistways and elevator cars, but that isn't so. They erroneously assume that all elevator cars are enclosed in - as you said - "tubes" separated from all of the other elevator cars and adjacent hoistways, but that is simply not accurate.

In large modern skyscrapers (such as the 57 storey one that I worked in for several years in downtown Toronto and several others that my beau continues to serve as a fire captain whose squad does elevator rescues in such skyscrapers), I know for a fact that there are multiple elevator cars that share hoistway space and are not individually enclosed. This common element, in fact, helps in high rise elevator rescues as the firefighters are able to get on top of an elevator car in a hoistway adjacent to the one in which people are trapped, position it so that they can then walk over to the top of the elevator car in which the people are trapped, and enter that elevator car to facilitate the rescue of those trapped.

(A similar rescue was made in one of the WTC towers in, I believe, 2000)

Also, many modern highrise buildings now have dedicated "firefighter elevators" which have - among other things - robust fire protection between the hoistway of the FF elevator car and the other hoistways, separate "shafts" if you will, but the WTC towers (and most other skyscrapers) did not have those at the time. It was not required by any of the codes during the time that the WTC towers existed but one of the recommendations that came out of the NIST report was that building codes ought to require these for buildings over a certain height, and that recommendation has since been endorsed by the IBC.

The buildings collapsed from the top, People survived in the core area, your bunk is debunked.

1. my bunk is not debunked because you COMPLTELY AVOIDED my question. perhaps you lack the intellegence to answer it i suppose.

2. secondary devices in the basement played several functions.
- weakened the core structure
- all the engineering rooms were destroyed. they were responsible for the water pumps which if functioning properly pump the water upwards through the building in the event of a fire! if you wanted the fire to continue then destroying the pump system would be imperative

3. the elevators were blown out. if you wanted to prevent firefighters from reaching the fire then disabling the elevator system would be imperative.

4. controlled demolition can be from the top down!!!!!!!!

5. people survived in the core because they were lucky and not located within the core but in offices alongside.

1. my bunk is not debunked because you COMPLTELY AVOIDED my question. perhaps you lack the intellegence to answer it i suppose.

2. secondary devices in the basement played several functions.
- weakened the core structure
- all the engineering rooms were destroyed. they were responsible for the water pumps which if functioning properly pump the water upwards through the building in the event of a fire! if you wanted the fire to continue then destroying the pump system would be imperative

3. the elevators were blown out. if you wanted to prevent firefighters from reaching the fire then disabling the elevator system would be imperative.

4. controlled demolition can be from the top down!!!!!!!!

5. people survived in the core because they were lucky and not located within the core but in offices alongside.

so answer my simple question. i answered yours!

peace

You are totally devoid of evidence. Do you make this up all by yourself? 1, you have been debunked for 6 years. 2. There were no secondary devices anywhere in the WTC. Failure to provide evidence 3. lol, a paranoid fantasy idea, without merit. 4. There was no CD, you have failed to provide evidence. 5. What? That does not make sense. Take a break and get clean.

Please give the full story? You left out the facts and evidence to support your ideas which must be dismissed as fantasy.

1. my bunk is not debunked because you COMPLTELY AVOIDED my question. perhaps you lack the intellegence to answer it i suppose.

2. secondary devices in the basement played several functions.
- weakened the core structure
- all the engineering rooms were destroyed. they were responsible for the water pumps which if functioning properly pump the water upwards through the building in the event of a fire! if you wanted the fire to continue then destroying the pump system would be imperative

3. the elevators were blown out. if you wanted to prevent firefighters from reaching the fire then disabling the elevator system would be imperative.

4. controlled demolition can be from the top down!!!!!!!!

5. people survived in the core because they were lucky and not located within the core but in offices alongside.

so answer my simple question. i answered yours!

peace

why do you lie and ignore the FACT that the column shapes at the basement level were built up from steel plate 3 inches thick? any device strong enough to "weaken" a column made up of 3 inch plate would have killed everyone in all the basement levels. The planes compromised the sprinkler system by cutting off the pipes at the impact level. Pumps had nothing to do with it.

Debunked. You are nothing more than a fantasist and terrorist apologist.

__________________911 resource site by Mark Robertshttp://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/homeGravy: Christopher7; You are a Basking Shark in a sea of ignorance.Galileo:The jury said I didn't have any mental defects or diseases, they declared me 100% sane. Has a jury ever declared you sane?
Don’t get me lol’n off my chesterfield dude.

We've answered this over and over again, despite your claim that "no one can answer this."

There is no requirement for a fireball to pass the elevator. All that is required is for fuel to pass the elevator. Vapor, liquid streams, droplets, whatever. The amount of fuel that has to pass, as I demonstrated rigorously, is quite reasonable.

The fuel almost certainly ignited at several different places. Not just one big 80-story high fireball. Lots of fireballs.

Very, very simple.

I will make this very simple for you – “mackey’s fuel-pool theory” was not the theory that my post #187 debunks. My post debunks the position of norseman, NIST, and the 911 commission who all clearly state that a fireball, not jet fuel, descended the elevator shaft 50 causing the subsequent damage in multiple basement levels.

Norseman states:
[quote=Norseman;2927286] The burning jet fuel cascading/raining down the elevator shafts of car number 6,7 and 50 would consume all available oxygen in the shaft on its way down. Behind the burning front of the fireball, in the shafts, there would follow a cloud of expanding hot gasses including evaporated jet fuel [quote]

NIST states:
"The doors were blown off by the fireball that came down the elevator shaft (Basement level of WTC 1)." (NIST NCSTAR 1-8, p.43)

As can be clearly seen, all of the above advocate the fireball theory and not the “mackey fuel-pool theory” so it would be perfectly legitimate if i simply ignored your comments because you are not, strictly speaking, defending the official theory that my post intended to debunk. You do recognise this fact?

As for my post #187 being “answered over and over again”...i havent heard one half way convincing answer from advocates of the official magic fireball theory and i seriously doubt that i will. In the context of the official explanation the problems posed in post #187 remain unanswered and like i said will remain so.

However what some like yourself attempt to do is basically avoid defending the impossible (official fireball theory) and give a more nuianced explanation that claims jet fuel in liquid, vapour and/or gas form descended the elevator shaft passed elevator car 50 creating the damage to multiple basement floors. So lets look at that:

1: elevator cars are not airtight that means that if liquid, vapour or gas were hurdling down the shaft they must have entered the elevator car given the over pressure. The occupants within the elevator did not report seeing or smelling jet fuel vapour or gas entering the car. This is not possible because humans can smell jet fuel as low as 1 part per million so how on earth did the jet fuel whether liquid vapour or gas pass the elevators without entering the elevator car? For a fuel/air mixture to ignite a range between 7000ppm to 50000ppm needs to established. So because the elevator shaft 50 was the ONLY shaft with access to the basement levels we are expected to believe that 7000ppm – 50000ppm of jet fuel passed the elevator car without even 1ppm being detected. moreover when the occupants arrived at b2-3 level they did not report smelling any jet fuel eventhough the supposedly jet fuel explosion had occured moments earlier.

3: according to mackey’s personal theory, jet fuel descended the freight elevator shaft and pooled in the shaft pit. Yet the explosion occurs above the shaft pit at floor b2-3.

4: you say “The fuel almost certainly ignited at several different places” which sounds very random yet these spontaneous ignitions managed to destroy the mechanical rooms in both towers disabling the water pumping system. doesnt sound very random to me.

1. my bunk is not debunked because you COMPLTELY AVOIDED my question. perhaps you lack the intellegence to answer it i suppose.

You got the first two words right. The rest, not so much. (And if you're going to attempt to denigrate DGM's - or anyone else's - intelligence, that would be a particularly good time to spell "intelligence" correctly and a particularly good time to demonstrate your own intelligence by utilizing correct grammar, punctuation, spelling, and capitalization.)

Originally Posted by thewholesoul

2. secondary devices in the basement played several functions.

There is no evidence of secondary devices in the basement.

Originally Posted by thewholesoul

- weakened the core structure

There is no evidence of the core structure being weakened at basement levels, and the collapse of the towers is not consistent with your assertion (in fact, the core of each tower stood for several seconds after the rest of the building collapsed).

Originally Posted by thewholesoul

- all the engineering rooms were destroyed. they were responsible for the water pumps which if functioning properly pump the water upwards through the building in the event of a fire! if you wanted the fire to continue then destroying the pump system would be imperative

There is no evidence that "all the engineering rooms were destroyed" by "secondary devices".

There were water supply systems throughout the towers - not just in the basements - including storage tanks on the 110th floors and supply piping from those throughout the towers.

However, with standpipes damaged by aircraft impact, structural damage and resulting fires, it is true that the firefighting capacity was horribly compromised - but not by bombs in the basement.

By the way, if, as you posit, there were bombs in the basement to weaken the core in order to facilitate collapse of the towers, what would be the purpose of destroying the basement water pumping operations to stymie firefighting efforts with respect to fires 80 and 90 floors above? Or are you suggesting that the terrorists who hijacked and deliberately flew the planes into the towers also expected that doing so would result in numerous huge fires over multiple floors, (at the impact floors and other floors to which jet fuel would naturally flow and to which fires would naturally ignite and spread) and that the terrorists knew or planned that these large fires, concomitant structural damage at the impact floors, and these purported "basement bombs" would operate in conjunction with one another to bring down the buildings?

I'm just not sure what it is that you are trying to present here as your theory, and I would appreciate it if you could flesh that out a bit.

Originally Posted by thewholesoul

3. the elevators were blown out. if you wanted to prevent firefighters from reaching the fire then disabling the elevator system would be imperative.

Some elevators were blown out - certainly not all of them. There were hundreds of people trapped in numerous elevators, after all, and many of them did, sadly, end up dying in them. However, in some instances, firefighters used elevators to get up higher than others had been able to reach; in some instances, firefighters used elevators to evacuate people; and in some instances, trapped occupants managed to free themselves. (See, for instance, 102 Minutes by Dwyer and Flynn for details).

In any event, the elevators were not disabled by basement bombs, but by the airplane impacts.

Originally Posted by thewholesoul

4. controlled demolition can be from the top down!!!!!!!!

If you use enough exclamation points, you just might convince readers that your unsupported assertion is true, even if your assertion has no rational connection to the collapse of the Twin Towers and the events of 9/11.

There is nothing about the collapses of the twin towers that would lead any rational person - possessed of all of the available facts and evidence - to say that they were "controlled demolitions".

Originally Posted by thewholesoul

5. people survived in the core because they were lucky and not located within the core but in offices alongside.

As far as I know, those who survived the collapses (as opposed to those who got out before the collapses were complete), were all in stairwells, which were within the core. I am not aware of anyone being rescued post-collapse from areas outside the core, but please correct me if I am wrong on this.